Lemon Sharks Public Workshop Recap

Lemon Shark - Photo by: Wolfgang Leander

Tonight I attended the FWC (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission) public workshop with a focus on Lemon Sharks - particularly on the banning of harvesting this shark species.  Back in June 2009, the FWC was presented with information regarding the vulnerability and status of the Lemon Shark.  

In August, a proposal was submitted to the commission to prohibit the take of lemon sharks, finally in September, the commission directed staff to investigate the proposal and return to the commission in December with a recommendation.


Some interesting data as to why the Lemon Shark fishing ban should be in place (as per the FWC):

• Additional pressure on lemon sharks due to recent changes in shark management
• NOAA Fisheries Service study found lemon sharks to be the most vulnerable of all 33 large coastal species
• Sexual maturity at 12-15 years of age and at lengths of around 90 inches or greater, 6 to 18 pups per litter...
• Tagging study found at least 7.5% mortality of adult population in one season.

Below are some of my observations and notes of what various people had to say - among them dive operators, commercial fishermen, scientists, divers, non-profits, and shark lovers:

• Lots of questions and doubts on the numbers of sharks killed by anglers (recreational) between 2000-2007 – average per year
• How fast people lose focus – look at trend
• Coral reefs are dying as is – taking out more apex predators will increase process.  Use history of commercial fishing and collapsed industries as examples
• It is in fishermen’s best interest to protect species that they are harvesting
• Commercial fishermen being punished for recreational harvest
• FWC has long history of waiting / failing to protect endangered species
• 4/6 lemon sharks a day (breeding size) – now he does not see that many in a season
• Ban at least during spawning months
• Wolves removed from the mountains – mountains die (good comparison)
• Wolves reintroduced to Yellowstone and vegetation came back
• We need our predators…
• Various non-profits represented and support the ban
• Information overload – too many numbers and studies to remember – all boils down to sharks being in trouble
• People started to become very repetitive…too much reading...speak
• Data is flaw…but you need to focus on the trend
• The shark is a resource…I think it is a living animal
• Doc speaks directly to commercial fishermen who earlier mentioned that there is no reliable data
• There is data – and it has been collected over 30-40 years – empirical data
• And that he is the one individual that loves lemons – only likes them now since one bit him ;)
• Lemon is the most vulnerable for many reasons – not just ease to catch.  They follow a long lifecycle similar to whales and even humans in the sense of development.  Not sexually mature until there are at least 12 years old
• Lemon sharks go up to 15 miles into fresh water rivers
• Protect the breeders – there should be an upper limit

In just sitting there and listening to the various people speak I could not help and think - we are deciding on the fate of a species based on $$$.  Many people speaking for or against the banning of harvesting lemon sharks have an economic agenda be it to take divers to see the sharks or those that catch and sell the meat.  The shark is a resource and nothing more - I sure hope not?

And while I completely support the ban of harvesting the Lemon Shark and any other species for that matter, I do hope that whatever plan is set in motion, contemplates the commercial fisherman as well.

An Update from Samuel Gruber and Lemon Sharks in Florida

Lemon Shark - Photo by: Wolf Leander

As per Samuel Gruber:

Dear All: Herewith is a summary version of the recent meeting in Fort Lauderdale where we presented testimony to the FWC. As Bill said, we have to keep up efforts as we move strongly in the conservation arena. Out goal will be to get the lemon shark on the prohibited list or at the very least extend its closed season. We will need to convince both the Florida Wildlife Commission and the National Marine Fisheries Commission and this will take data, effort and time as well as funding to get the job done. There are funding agencies in interested in helping us attain this goal.

Changes to Current Shark Fishing Rules on the Horizon--Our effort to get Florida’s

Lemon Shark, Negaprion brevirostris protected by the FWC

Walt Sterns and Samuel H. Gruber

Last week we attended one of five Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) public workshops held this month to receive comments on a plan to bring he Florida’s shark regulations into agreement with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's (ASMFC) Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Coastal Sharks.

Attending last night’s meeting, held at International Game Fish Association headquarters in Ft. Lauderdale was Gary and Brenda Adkison for the Shark Foundation, Steve Stock for the Guy Harvey Ocean Foundation, Drs. Samuel Gruber and Bryan Franks for the Bimini Biological Field Station, Bill Parks for the Christine Baltzer Parks Environmental Foundation and members of Reef Rescue, a few dive operation representatives, some university graduate students and Walt Sterns, senior author of this report.

The series of meetings was to record public comment on various options for amending its shark management rules (68B-44, F.A.C.), with the possibility to modify them to comply with or go beyond the ASMFC shark management plan.

According to the introduction by FWC’s staff, the ASMFC’s management plan sharks includes a minimum size limit of 54” (4.5 feet)/137.2 cm, measured tip of nose to fork of the tail; a bag limit for lemon, bull, sandbar, dusky, hammerhead, tiger, etc., and other caveats designed to "achieve conformity" with the regulations agreed upon by the ASMFC.

Public comments were generally in agreement that instituting a blanket, minimum size limit (54”) without taking into account that species’ natural history, would be counterproductive and not protect or benefit the conservation and management of sharks.

Several informed comments were presented, based on the life history strategy of the large coastal species suggesting that it is more important to protect the young breeders than the juveniles. Thus the commercial and recreational take should reflect a minimum size that excludes sharks in their first years of maturity. Such a regulation will protect both the juveniles and first breeders. In the lemon shark, this is about 74” or 190 cm fork length. Other problems for large coastal shark include development or destruction of coastal nursery habitats required for juvenile development.

More specifically In the case of the lemon shark, several of the public spoke in favor of moving this species to prohibited status. The lemon shark’s life history pattern was discussed and it was pointed out that this shark has been reported by NMFS as THE most vulnerable of the large coastal species. Lemon sharks take from 12-15 years to reach sexual maturity equivalent to a length of approximately 92” (7.8”)/235 cm which is a lot bigger than the present suggested minimum length of the ASFMC.

From juvenile to adult, lemon sharks most of their lives in a coastal habitat from very shallow to 200 feet of water. This nearness to shore makes them highly vulnerable to both commercial and recreation fishers. But more recently it has been shown that adult lemon sharks from far and wide gather on large aggregations off Palm Beach and Martin counties. This greatly increases their exposure to targeted fishing. It would not be unreasonable to predict that if targeted the entire breeding population could be wiped out in a number of days or weeks. Based on the data we have been compiling over the past three years on the South Florida’s lemon shark aggregations, the “highly vulnerable” status could be taken as an understatement.

From a commercial standpoint, the lemon shark catch has historically been miniscule representing only 0.7 of the entire Atlantic coast long line fishery. Lemons rank # 7 in commercial landings at 62,000 lbs. vs. 1.5 Million pounds of sandbar shark taken annually. Further the value of the fins is relatively lows, being grade B on the world market. Thus the total value of the lemon shark take is very small and would not seriously impact the economy of the fishery if they were excluded.

Historically the lemon shark was not particularly targeted or under heavy fishing pressure. But recently that picture has changed as fishers are trying for larger individual sharks.

Our goal over the next several months will be to bring together all relevant information on the lemon shark to make the case that this species is highly vulnerable, has a relatively low abundance and could be extirpated from Florida waters unless protected. This applies to both federal and state regulation. We believe that elevating lemon sharks to a prohibited species for both commercial and recreational fishers is a goal that can be achieve with the help of the public at large.

More information: To see the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's (ASMFC) Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Coastal Sharks in its entirety - http://www.asmfc.org/speciesDocument...stalSharks.pdf

Shark Management - Public Workshops - Florida

Today I attended a workshop put together by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission on shark management in Florida (FWC).

Some background: The FWC has scheduled a series of public workshops this month to receive comments on the management of sharks. The FWC is seeking feedback on options for amending its shark management rules that would comply with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Coastal Sharks.

The Commission wants to hear public comments regarding the recreational and commercial harvest of sharks in state waters of Florida, including possible changes to shark bag and size limits, the prohibited shark species list, and shark landing requirements and gear rules.

To date these meeting have been held in Panama City (no one attended), Coco Beach (predominantly commercial fishermen) and now Ft. Lauderdale / Miami with two more session in the Keys I believe. The two representatives of the FWC gave a presentation reviewing current statewide regulations, FWC managed species, prohibited species, and a number of statistics about recreational fishing (and the impact it has on sharks).

Issues covered throughout the night were:

1. Prohibited species list
2. Landing requirements
3. Minimum size limits
4. Allowable gear
5. Bag limit

The last hour was open for attendees to give testimonies and raise concerns. The recurring themes were adding the lemon sharks to the prohibited species list, aligning state and federal water regulations, banning recreational shark fishing of certain species, size limitation (saving the breeding stock) among others.

The meeting was very amicable, I was expecting a lot more temper flares, must have been due to the fact that most people at the meetings were for sharks. And the commercial fishermen that were they understood the situation, many had worked hand-in-hand with various scientists and researchers who have actually shown and taught the scientific community a lot about sharks. I was pleasantly surprised at their understand and knowledge of sharks, would be great to see more collaboration between these and other parties.

And as always, it was great to run into some friends: Neil H, Brendal D, Mary O, Lupo D, Gary A, and the Gruber's (Doc and Mary) - all of which had great testimonies and comments...and a few laughs. Neil opened by saying that he is not as old as Doc (who has been researching sharks for 50 years).

Remains to be seen what the result of these workshops are, but I applaud the fact that the FWC is making this an issue.

UPDATE FROM MARY O'MALLEY

O.K the summary ... Sharks were very well represented at the FWC Shark Management meeting in Dania Beach last night! Here's a partial list of attendees:

Doc Gruber + a few other scientists who work with him
Neil Hammerschlag + Leanne
Gary & Brenda Adkison
Jeff Finkus (also from the Shark Foundation)
Walt Stearns
Steve Stock
Jeff Torode - Ft Lauderdale Dive Assn
Brendal Davis
Felix Leander
2 former commercial shark fishermen - Mike Newman and Mike Fay - who now work with Doc Gruber to help him catch lemon sharks to tag.
Several other shark conservation people whose names I didn't get and a reporter from the Sun Sentinel. David Bingham, an FWC enforcement officer was also there. And Lupo and me.

Yes, 100% pro-shark comments!!!

The FWC representative told us that no one showed up for the meeting in Panama City and the meeting in Cocoa (Brevard County) was mainly commercial fishermen. There are two meetings left -- one tonight in Islamorada and then Punta Gorda on Thursday. Let's get some good representation at both of these meetings as well.

The main topics:

1. Overview of the ASMFC Plan Requirements -- Florida must comply with these rules, but may also be more restrictive
2. The ASMFC Plan applies to the Atlantic Coast of Florida -- should the same measures apply on the Gulf Coast?
3. Should Commercial and Recreational fisheries continue to be managed under the same rules?
4. Suggestions for alternative measures for shark management
5. Should FL rules be more restrictive than ASMFC?

Items covered under the ASMFC Plan:

1. Addition of Silky, Sandbar and Caribbean Sharpnose sharks to the prohibited species list. Should any other species be added?
2. Landing requirements - Currently sharks must be landed with fins intact. ASMFC plan calls for sharks to be landed with the head, tail and fins intact.
3. Min. size limit of 54 inches (fork length) excluding Atlantic sharpnose, bonnethead, blacknose, finetooth and smooth dogfish.
4. Gear - only hook and line for sharks
5. Bag limit -- currently 1 max per person or 2 max per vessel per day. ASMFC plan calls for 1 max per vessel per day plus one each of the small sharks excluded from the min size limit. Option for FL would be to keep the same current bag limit of 1 max per person or 2 max per vessel, but require that then second shark (per vessel) be a bonnethead, blacknose, etc.

Process:

Aaron Podey, Fisheries Management Analyst with FWC, gave a short presentation (I will scan and send), then took questions, and then gave the opportunity for attendees to provide testimony. Everyone who wanted to speak filled out a card and had a chance to speak. Very organized and easy for everyone to make a comment. Aaron and the other FWC analyst there took notes and will put together a staff recommendation based on the public comments received. In September there will be a draft rule hearing, then in December more public comments will be taken and the Commission will vote on it. Any new rules passed will go into effect in January 2010.

Summary of Comments:

1. Several people suggested banning "live mounts" for taxidermy -- should require that mounts be made from photo / measurement as with billfish. Currently incentives from taxidermy companies to charter boat captains encourage customers to kill the shark just for the sake of the mount. The reasoning is that once they've killed the shark, the client can't back out. One of the fishermen commented that it would be difficult to legislate what people do with their catch once they've killed it, and it would make more sense to just regulate which and how many sharks can be taken.

2. Much discussion about adding shark species to the prohibited list -- especially lemon sharks and great hammerheads.

3. Much discussion about instituting maximum size limits to protect breeding female sharks. Seasonal and area closures were also proposed with a great deal of scientific justification to illustrate how entire populations can be quickly wiped out -- even with the small bag limits in place -- since the aggregations of productive breeding females are being targeted.

4. A maximum seasonal limit was also proposed.

5. Catch and release only for all large coastal sharks was proposed.

6. Need for more enforcement and manpower was discussed. The FWC enforcement officer agreed that this has been a problem, since they have been short staffed. They have been filling positions and will soon have all positions filled.

7. One of the fishermen stated definitively that the meat from any large shark is inedible by the time it's brought back to shore by a recreational boat. A few other people brought up the FL DOH advisory against eating meat from any sharks over 43 inches. The other fisherman suggested that if you're going to allow recreational fishermen to "harvest" large coastal sharks, they should be allowed to filet at sea, so that the meat can at least be used and not discarded.

8. The only representation from the recreational fishing side was Steve Stock, and he was completely in favor of everything that was proposed. He also brought up the Shark Free Marinas concept of putting pressure on marinas to not allow landing of sharks on their docks.

9. Neil suggested that FWC take a precautionary approach to management of species on which there is insufficient information --- if there's not sufficient information, then protect unless you have data to show that the species is not overfished. This is an excellent suggestion and we should get more people to press FWC on this point. Basically the only sharks that they do have sufficient information on are the ones that are relatively plentiful, since they're getting their data from fishing numbers. The ones that need the most protection in many cases are being ignored because of lack of data.